Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 1]

Central Administrative Tribunal - Chandigarh

Ved Mitter Gill vs Ut Of Chandigarh on 23 January, 2019

Author: P. Gopinath

Bench: P. Gopinath

                                  1
                                                (OA No. 060/1044/2016 &
                                                   M.A. No. 60/141/2019)

            CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
                    CHANDIGARH BENCH
                            ...
                   M.A NO. 60/141/2019
        In ORIGINAL APPLICATION N0. 060/1044/2016

       Chandigarh, this the 23rd day of January, 2019
                                 ...
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. SANJEEV KAUSHIK, MEMBER (J) &
         HON'BLE MRS. P. GOPINATH, MEMBER (A)
                                        ...
Ved Mitter Gill aged 67 years, son of late Shri Bhalle Ram Gill, Ex.
Deputy Superintendent, Model Jail, Burail, Chandigarh, resident of
Flat No. A-12, Uppa Marbel Arch. Manimajra, U.T.          Chandigarh
(Group-B).
                                                        ....APPLICANT
( By Advocate: Shri Amit Chaudhary)

                               VERSUS

  1. U.T. Chandigarh Administration through Home Secretary,
     Mini Civil Secretariat, Sector 9, Chandigarh.
  2. The Administrator, U.T. Chandigarh Administration, Mini
     Civil Secretariat, Sector 9, Chandigarh.
  3. Advisor     to    the     Administrator,    U.T.     Chandigarh
     Administration, Mini Civil Secretariat, Sector 9, Chandigarh.


                                                  ....RESPONDENTS
(By Advocate: Shri K.K. Thakur)

                             ORDER (oral)

SANJEEV KAUSHIK, MEMBER (J) M.A. NO. 60/141/2019 The present M.A. has been filed by the applicant with a prayer that the O.A. No. 60/1044/2016 filed by him, which stands adjourned sine dine vide order dated 3.8.2017 may be taken up for hearing and same may be disposed of as withdrawn with liberty to file a fresh one on the same cause of action. 2

(OA No. 060/1044/2016 & M.A. No. 60/141/2019)

2. Notice to counsel opposite.

3. Mr. K.K. Thakur, Advocate present in Court, accepts notice and did not object to the prayer being allowed.

4. The main file of the O.A. has been called for and in view of the prayer made in the M.A. the O.A. is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to the applicant to file a fresh one on the same cause of action.




 (P.GOPINATH)                               (SANJEEV KAUSHIK)
   MEMBER (A)                                      MEMBER (J)

Dated: 23.01.2019
`SK'
 3
    (OA No. 060/1044/2016 &
       M.A. No. 60/141/2019)